is it?
Kheldragar wrote:
No
20XXPhilantropist wrote:
What year was it again?
That was then, today you have LightBoost technology.YayMii wrote:
Speaking of Taiko: I just remembered that I took a bunch of LCD vs CRT comparison shots almost 2 years ago that are relevant to this question.
It's been forever since I played standard mode on an LCD so I don't know really how much of an advantage it gives, but it makes scrolling modes like Taiko so much more comfortable to play (again, assuming it's set to a refresh rate that doesn't murder your eyes).
LCD=Display lag (more so with lightboost)lolcubes wrote:
That was then, today you have LightBoost technology.YayMii wrote:
Speaking of Taiko: I just remembered that I took a bunch of LCD vs CRT comparison shots almost 2 years ago that are relevant to this question.
It's been forever since I played standard mode on an LCD so I don't know really how much of an advantage it gives, but it makes scrolling modes like Taiko so much more comfortable to play (again, assuming it's set to a refresh rate that doesn't murder your eyes).
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
This isn't true at all. All monitors have display lag simply for the fact that the picture is updated in frames. Your fancy pants 60Hz CRT monitor can still have a display lag of up to 16.6ms. If I'm using an LCD with 144Hz refresh rate, I might end up having less display lag than your CRT, even after response time (which is not instant on a CRT either, which is why you can see the strobe refresh on recordings - usually around 1ms).ZenithPhantasm wrote:
LCD=Display lag (more so with lightboost)
CRT=No display lag
Yeah, of course, but 144Hz LCDs are expensive I got my trusty CRT for $40 when LightBoost was already a thing.lolcubes wrote:
That was then, today you have LightBoost technology.
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
First things first: 60Hz CRT and "fancy" do not belong in the same sentence... the CRT's strobe can cause harm to your eyes if you run at such a low refresh rate. The flicker is actually visible to the human eye when the refresh rate is that low.Philosofikal wrote:
This isn't true at all. All monitors have display lag simply for the fact that the picture is updated in frames. Your fancy pants 60Hz CRT monitor can still have a display lag of up to 16.6ms. If I'm using an LCD with 144Hz refresh rate, I might end up having less display lag than your CRT, even after response time (which is not instant on a CRT either, which is why you can see the strobe refresh on recordings - usually around 1ms).ZenithPhantasm wrote:
LCD=Display lag (more so with lightboost)
CRT=No display lag
Five dollars says that refresh rate is at 640x480 (or maaaaybe 800x600) resolutionYayMii wrote:
In fact, mine goes up to 180Hz.
Yeah, of course... but I can still go up to 140Hz at 1366x768 which is all I need for osu!.Philosofikal wrote:
Five dollars says that refresh rate is at 640x480 (or maaaaybe 800x600) resolutionYayMii wrote:
In fact, mine goes up to 180Hz.
No, I do not. The shorter the strobe time, the less the input lag, since the strobe occurs at the beginning of the frame.ZenithPhantasm wrote:
Lol you have it backwardsPhilosofikal wrote:
On my monitor, you can even adjust the duration of the strobe to decrease input lag (shorter strobe) or decrease motion blur (longer strobe)
If you can do 140Hz at 1366x768, then your CRT is utterly exceptional. It's better than the Sony FW900, from what I've read, actually. What is the model of this screen?YayMii wrote:
Yeah, of course... but I can still go up to 140Hz at 1366x768 which is all I need for osu!.
And there are still better CRTs than this one out there. But as I said, I spent only $40 on this thing, so I'm okay.
It's a Viewsonic PF815. It actually has around the same specs refresh-rate-wise and resolution-wise compared to the FW900 (both have 121kHz horizontal refresh rate, so both monitors can handle 1366x768@140Hz, but the FW900 only maxes out at 160Hz vertical compared to my 180Hz). The only thing that the FW900 has over this is a wider screen size and aspect ratio (22.5" 16:10 vs 20" 4:3), but I'm completely fine running osu! in a letterbox and playing my FPSes in 4:3 so it doesn't really bother me.Philosofikal wrote:
If you can do 140Hz at 1366x768, then your CRT is utterly exceptional. It's better than the Sony FW900, from what I've read, actually. What is the model of this screen?
The backlight is only on when the frame is completed. For the majority of the time it is off.Philosofikal wrote:
No, I do not. The shorter the strobe time, the less the input lag, since the strobe occurs at the beginning of the frame.
Your post would suggest that you believe that a strobing backlight functions like a CRT. A backlight is on, not off, for the majority of the duration.
Or rather they were correct and you were wrongPhilosofikal wrote:
When I said "strobe", I meant when the backlight is off (I realize now after reading more that it is used to refer when it is turning on, and not turning off).
It's also variable how long the strobe lasts. You can set it anywhere from 0.5ms to 5ms on my monitor. Usually, it's correct that it's off the majority of the time (the shorter it is, the less motion blur, but the screen can get very dark). It's a fixed time, however (unless you have variable refresh like Freesync) - the page on Blur Busters is technically correct, but quite misleading.
You're realizing that you're talking to RSI-Relax-chan with most topplays being a year old?Philosofikal wrote:
(and you're not because you have a hit accuracy of 90% which is pathetic)
Best lcds are around 10ms from what i can find. http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/Wikipedia wrote:
Image adjustments typically involved reshaping the signal waveform but without storage, so the image is written to the screen as fast as it is received, with only nanoseconds of delay for the signal to traverse the wiring inside the device from input to the screen.